[R-390] Please spare us

[Peter Worrall, G4GJL]

.....Two spurious responses if my memory serves me. And those barely audible
with the antenna (aerial over here) disconnected.

Peter

G4GJL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Veenstra, Lester" <Lester.Veenstra at intelsatgeneral.com>
To: "Roy Morgan" <roy.morgan at nist.gov>; "Kenneth Arthur Crips"
<CRIPS01 at MSN.COM>; "R-390" <R-390 at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 8:13 AM
Subject: RE: [R-390] Please spare us


Problem with the Racal's is not sensitivity which as a practical matter
is not significant, but rather, the number of spurious responses it had.

Lester Veenstra
Senior Engineering Program Manager
Intelsat General
6550 Rock Springs Drive, Suite 450
Bethesda Maryland, 20817
+1-301-571-1212
e-mail: lester.veenstra at intelsatgeneral.com


-----Original Message-----
From: r-390-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:r-390-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Roy Morgan
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 10:36 AM
To: Kenneth Arthur Crips; R-390
Subject: Re: [R-390] Please spare us

At 07:13 PM 6/5/2005, Kenneth Arthur Crips wrote:
>... Instead of arguing which radio is better the discussion sho(uld)
>center on what is different and why they are different.

Ken,

There is a fellow in my antique radio club (www.maarc.org) who has had a

long and varied career in radio, both military and civilian. He's VERY
knowledgeable about all sorts of radios. I heard him say once that the
Racal RA.17 was ten times more sensitive than the R-R90A.  At the time,
I
though "probably not!"  Then later I got a manual for the Racal (and
later
yet a radio itself) and found that the specifications for sensitivity
are
very similar.

I have not yet repaired and aligned the Racal RA.17 UC that I have, so I

can't report on it's performance.

I was interested to see in a Navy training manual, "Cryptological
Acquisition Equipments" (or some such title) that both the R-390A, and
the
Racal RA.17 under a military number, are described.

>...the Lysco model 600 Transmaster which has to be one of the worst
>transmitters ever produced for sale, the engineers who designed this
turd
>must have been drunk.

OR ... under directions from their employer  that were a severe
compromise
of quality and performance in the interest of cheapness to make and/or
production schedules.

I have just acquired an RBB and an RBC, Perhaps the original Boatanchors
at
85 pounds each plus 55 pounds each power supply.  Designed in the late
1930's, these have been described as a "dream project" for the RCA
engineers, with no cost spared for quality and reliability.  I look
forward
to the day that they are restored and aligned and pulling in the
moderately
high signal levels they are only capable of.

Roy

- Roy Morgan, K1LKY since 1959 - Keep 'em Glowing!
7130 Panorama Drive, Derwood MD 20855
Home: 301-330-8828 Cell 301-928-7794
Work: Voice: 301-975-3254,  Fax: 301-948-6213
roy.morgan at nist.gov --

_____________________________________________________________
R-390 mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/r-390
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/faq.htm
Post: mailto:R-390 at mailman.qth.net
Unsubscribe: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/options/r-390
_____________________________________________________________
R-390 mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/r-390
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/faq.htm
Post: mailto:R-390 at mailman.qth.net
Unsubscribe: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/options/r-390